• Key point. Employees who bring a disability discrimination claim against their employer must demonstrate that (1) they suffer from a disability; (2) they were otherwise qualified for the job in question; (3) they were subject to an adverse employment action; and (4) they were replaced by a non—disabled person or treated less favorably than non—disabled employees. If they prove all 4 elements, then the burden of proof shifts to the employer to establish a legitimate, non—discriminatory reason for its action. If it does so, then the plaintiff must prove that the employer’s reason is a “pretext” for discrimination.

A federal court in Louisiana ruled that a church school did not violate the Americans with Disabilities Act by not rehiring a teacher who had to temporarily quit her job because of pregnancy—related varicose veins. A female teacher (the “plaintiff”) was employed by a Catholic parochial school since 1979. In 1984, doctors determined that she was suffering from varicose veins. This circulatory problem worsened with her pregnancies and prevented her from standing or sitting for long periods of time. The school accommodated her by providing her with a first floor classroom because of her discomfort in climbing stairs. While pregnant with her fifth child, the plaintiff did not teach during the 1991—92 school year and received disability payments from the school. She returned to the school for the next school year but left during the middle of the year when she became pregnant with her sixth child. She received disability payments during this time period. In January of 1994, her doctor released her to return to teaching, but the school had no available positions since the release occurred during the middle of the school year. In March 1994, the plaintiff informed school officials that she wanted to teach during the 1994—95 school year. The school’s principal informed the plaintiff that she would probably not be hired for the next school year because the school would be retaining her replacement. When the replacement teacher indicated that she would not be returning the next year, the principal hired a teacher from a list of 75 applicants. She chose not to rehire the plaintiff because of her evaluation of the plaintiff’s professional capabilities and past attendance record. The principal felt that the new teacher, who had 11 years of teaching experience, was better qualified than the plaintiff. The plaintiff sued the school, claiming that its decision not to rehire her violated the Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA).

The court noted that the ADA prohibits discrimination by an employer against a qualified individual with a disability on the basis of that disability. The term “qualified individual with a disability” means an individual with a disability who, with or without reasonable accommodation, can perform the essential functions of the job. In order to prevail in an ADA lawsuit, a plaintiff must establish a “prima facie case” of disability discrimination by showing that (1) she suffered from a disability; (2) she was otherwise qualified for the job; (3) she was subject to an adverse employment action; and (4) she was replaced by a non—disabled person or treated less favorably than non—disabled employees. The employer can rebut the prima facie case by offering a legitimate, non—discriminatory reason for its action. Once the employer does this, the plaintiff then has the burden to prove that the employer’s reason is a “pretext” for discrimination.

The court noted that the school offered non—discriminatory reasons for the principal’s decision not to rehire the plaintiff. The school’s evidence includes the principal’s statements that her decision was not based on the plaintiff’s medical condition, but on the plaintiff’s attendance record and on what the principal perceived to be the plaintiff’s professional shortcomings. The principal made her decision based on her personal knowledge of the plaintiff obtained over a ten year period of working with or supervising her. In addition, the principal claimed that she did not rehire the plaintiff because she found a more qualified teacher. As a result, the school established a legitimate, non—discriminatory reason for its decision not to rehire the plaintiff. It was then up to the plaintiff to prove that the employer’s reason was a “pretext” for discrimination. The court concluded that the plaintiff failed to meet this burden.

Application. This case provides an excellent review of the procedure that is followed in discrimination cases. The person alleging discrimination has the initial burden of proof, which is called the “prima facie case.” This means that “victims” must prove that (1) they suffer from a disability; (2) they were otherwise qualified for the job in question; (3) they were subject to an adverse employment action; and (4) they were replaced by a non—disabled person or treated less favorably than non—disabled employees. If the victim establishes all 4 elements of a prima facie case, then the burden of proof shifts to the employer to establish a legitimate, non—discriminatory reason for its action. If it does so, then the plaintiff must prove that the employer’s reason is a “pretext” for discrimination. Kent v. Roman Catholic Church, 1997 WL 30201 (E.D. La. 1997). [ Americans with Disabilities Act]

© Copyright 1998 by Church Law & Tax Report. All rights reserved. This publication is designed to provide accurate and authoritative information in regard to the subject matter covered. It is provided with the understanding that the publisher is not engaged in rendering legal, accounting, or other professional service. If legal advice or other expert assistance is required, the services of a competent professional person should be sought. Church Law & Tax Report, PO Box 1098, Matthews, NC 28106. Reference Code: m43 m65 c0298